Can someone explain to me why I as a DC taxpayer should be paying to house a homeless guy from North Carolina? Isn't he North Carolina's problem? Shouldn't NC be paying for him? I think they should.

Can someone explain to me why I should put a guy with raging untreated mental illness into an apartment when he destroyed the last place he lived? Seems like poor stewardship of taxpayer dollars. I'd do it if he's getting treatment and has solid case management and oversight in place, but otherwise? Nah.

Can someone explain to me why I should put a guy with a raging untreated drug addiction into an apartment when he's been known to sell the appliances, fixtures, even rip the copper wiring out to sell for drug money? I'd do it if he's getting treatment and has solid case management in place, but otherwise? Nah.

I'm more than willing to help those in need but I feel zero obligation whatsoever to take care of those who take advantage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi all, if you have time to whine on DCUM about homeless people you have time to google the answers to your questions. Yes many cities do bus "our citizens" to lower cost of living areas. It doesn't necessarily help them.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvg7ba/instead-of-helping-homeless-people-cities-are-bussing-them-out-of-town

It doesn't solve the problem but it still has to be a lot better than being in the highest cost-of-living part of the country. Even if the homeless get a disability check or other source of money it won't go as far here in DC than it would elsewhere. And the services like providing food for them costs donors and taxpayers a whole lot more to do here in DC than it would elsewhere. Also, when other municipalities send thousands of homeless to San Francisco or Washington DC it overwhelms and breaks the system, as it has done with the thousands sent here by Greg Abbott.

So no, it doesn't make the problem go away but it is nonetheless better and makes a lot more sense to bus them out of expensive locations where the homeless have been historically concentrated than to do nothing and let the current paradigm just get worse and worse.

Thank you for sharing your uneducated opinion. So valuable.

We've already seen your "educated" opinion - that its's somehow fine to just allow every other community in America to bus their own homeless, their own mentally ill, their own drug addicts away and dump them on cities like San Francisco, DC, Philadelphia and so on. That it's somehow fine to burden the cities with all of that, overwhelming their shelters, their mental health treatment and intervention infrastructure, their police, their social services, their charities, their tax base etc. That's your brilliance already on display with the tent camps and poop on sidewalks. BRILLIANT. What an educated genius you are. CONGRATULATIONS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi all, if you have time to whine on DCUM about homeless people you have time to google the answers to your questions. Yes many cities do bus "our citizens" to lower cost of living areas. It doesn't necessarily help them.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvg7ba/instead-of-helping-homeless-people-cities-are-bussing-them-out-of-town

It doesn't solve the problem but it still has to be a lot better than being in the highest cost-of-living part of the country. Even if the homeless get a disability check or other source of money it won't go as far here in DC than it would elsewhere. And the services like providing food for them costs donors and taxpayers a whole lot more to do here in DC than it would elsewhere. Also, when other municipalities send thousands of homeless to San Francisco or Washington DC it overwhelms and breaks the system, as it has done with the thousands sent here by Greg Abbott.

So no, it doesn't make the problem go away but it is nonetheless better and makes a lot more sense to bus them out of expensive locations where the homeless have been historically concentrated than to do nothing and let the current paradigm just get worse and worse.

Thank you for sharing your uneducated opinion. So valuable.

Anonymous wrote:Hi all, if you have time to whine on DCUM about homeless people you have time to google the answers to your questions. Yes many cities do bus "our citizens" to lower cost of living areas. It doesn't necessarily help them.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvg7ba/instead-of-helping-homeless-people-cities-are-bussing-them-out-of-town

It doesn't solve the problem but it still has to be a lot better than being in the highest cost-of-living part of the country. Even if the homeless get a disability check or other source of money it won't go as far here in DC than it would elsewhere. And the services like providing food for them costs donors and taxpayers a whole lot more to do here in DC than it would elsewhere. Also, when other municipalities send thousands of homeless to San Francisco or Washington DC it overwhelms and breaks the system, as it has done with the thousands sent here by Greg Abbott.

So no, it doesn't make the problem go away but it is nonetheless better and makes a lot more sense to bus them out of expensive locations where the homeless have been historically concentrated than to do nothing and let the current paradigm just get worse and worse.

Hi all, if you have time to whine on DCUM about homeless people you have time to google the answers to your questions. Yes many cities do bus "our citizens" to lower cost of living areas. It doesn't necessarily help them.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvg7ba/instead-of-helping-homeless-people-cities-are-bussing-them-out-of-town

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP is incorrect. People are allowed to self certify in DC without ID.

Upper NW has an area in which vouchers are funded at 187% of HUD market rate, highest in the nation.

You are confusing the DC Housing Authority with homelessness services. They are completely separate programs.

I'm not confusing anything. It is an overlapping population.

https://dhs.dc.gov/page/services-individuals-experiencing-homelessness

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/home-front/opinion-the-dc-housing-vouchers-system-is-broken-its-on-the-mayor-to-fix-it/

https://thedcline.org/2022/07/22/why-has-dc-used-only-one-fifth-of-this-years-new-housing-vouchers-so-far/ - This guy who came to DC for job that did not pan out - why not go back where there was a lower cost of living or where he had a support network?

First, how do you know he came from a lower COL area? Second, it costs money to travel. Either you have to have a car and money for gas, or money for a train or bus or plane ticket. Not everyone has that. Then you are assuming that he has a support network wherever he came from that could help him. Not everyone has that.

NP and I am worried this will sound snarky but I mean it seriously- why don’t we offer free travel for those who want to move or could have better opportunities in a lower COL area? We give people crossing the border illegally free travel around the country. Why not our citizens who are in housed and can afford a better quality of life elsewhere.

Lower COL areas don't want your homeless problem. You offer more services to the unhomed.

They send their homeless to DC. We don't want them.

+1

You think all of these homeless people are from DC? Come on now.

Ain’t no jobs for fo these young brothers. Lot of people don’t want blacks in their building. Saying they caused problems.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP is incorrect. People are allowed to self certify in DC without ID.

Upper NW has an area in which vouchers are funded at 187% of HUD market rate, highest in the nation.

You are confusing the DC Housing Authority with homelessness services. They are completely separate programs.

I'm not confusing anything. It is an overlapping population.

https://dhs.dc.gov/page/services-individuals-experiencing-homelessness

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/home-front/opinion-the-dc-housing-vouchers-system-is-broken-its-on-the-mayor-to-fix-it/

https://thedcline.org/2022/07/22/why-has-dc-used-only-one-fifth-of-this-years-new-housing-vouchers-so-far/ - This guy who came to DC for job that did not pan out - why not go back where there was a lower cost of living or where he had a support network?

First, how do you know he came from a lower COL area? Second, it costs money to travel. Either you have to have a car and money for gas, or money for a train or bus or plane ticket. Not everyone has that. Then you are assuming that he has a support network wherever he came from that could help him. Not everyone has that.

NP and I am worried this will sound snarky but I mean it seriously- why don’t we offer free travel for those who want to move or could have better opportunities in a lower COL area? We give people crossing the border illegally free travel around the country. Why not our citizens who are in housed and can afford a better quality of life elsewhere.

Lower COL areas don't want your homeless problem. You offer more services to the unhomed.

They send their homeless to DC. We don't want them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it crazy to accommodate so many in DC, why can't federal government give them incentives to go to areas where cost of living is low and entry level jobs in abundance?

That's exactly what they should be doing.

Unfortunately it's political. The areas where cost of living is low are red. Meanwhile the entry level jobs that are in abundance are either in blue high cost of living areas or are manual labor. The blue side doesn't want to be seen as forcing people to do backbreaking labor, with all the connotations that brings, while the red side thinks there is a conspiracy to replace them, with all the connotations that brings. Neither could agree to it and the rhetoric from both sides would be horrific.

It's a good idea though. The tricky part is coming up with an effective incentive or disincentive.

Theoretically something modeled on the refugee resettlement program could work but can't imagine that being done at scale.

No matter how much the trend and projection data show the above is untrue, people will repeat it. The US has a decreasing proportion of unskilled low skilled jobs, and it will keep decreasing. And of the 3,000 US counties, it is blue ones that constitute more poverty in terms of lower average COL after benefits. Look at counties, not states.

As far as the blue side engaging in horrific rhetoric that any resistance to their policies is racist, that is no surprise.

Anonymous wrote: There are a lot of a-hole cops, mayors and sheriffs who pull Greg Abbott stunts like rounding up their homeless in their own town and putting them on a bus with a one-way bus ticket to DC.

That program is 100% voluntary. No one is being bussed elsewhere without asking to be. That you don't know that means you should question your news/information sources.
And DC can and will take a couple hundred thousand more illegals

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP is incorrect. People are allowed to self certify in DC without ID.

Upper NW has an area in which vouchers are funded at 187% of HUD market rate, highest in the nation.

You are confusing the DC Housing Authority with homelessness services. They are completely separate programs.

I'm not confusing anything. It is an overlapping population.

https://dhs.dc.gov/page/services-individuals-experiencing-homelessness

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/home-front/opinion-the-dc-housing-vouchers-system-is-broken-its-on-the-mayor-to-fix-it/

https://thedcline.org/2022/07/22/why-has-dc-used-only-one-fifth-of-this-years-new-housing-vouchers-so-far/ - This guy who came to DC for job that did not pan out - why not go back where there was a lower cost of living or where he had a support network?

First, how do you know he came from a lower COL area? Second, it costs money to travel. Either you have to have a car and money for gas, or money for a train or bus or plane ticket. Not everyone has that. Then you are assuming that he has a support network wherever he came from that could help him. Not everyone has that.

NP and I am worried this will sound snarky but I mean it seriously- why don’t we offer free travel for those who want to move or could have better opportunities in a lower COL area? We give people crossing the border illegally free travel around the country. Why not our citizens who are in housed and can afford a better quality of life elsewhere.

Lower COL areas don't want your homeless problem. You offer more services to the unhomed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it crazy to accommodate so many in DC, why can't federal government give them incentives to go to areas where cost of living is low and entry level jobs in abundance?

They definitely do this but many people understandably don’t want to move away from family/friends, especially to more rural places that have far fewer available resources like child care, mental health care, etc.

The demographics of my hometown in Western Pennsylvania changed a great deal due to the importation of Section 8 families from DC, Philly, and other cities. It’s big time Trump country though and I sure wouldn’t want to live there as a minority, poor or not.

So they want to stick around DC for "friends and family" yet those friends and family obviously haven't done a damn thing for them and aren't helping, given they're homeless.
Doesn't really sound like a viable reason. Meanwhile there are a lot of homeless in DC who aren't from DC for whom that reasoning doesn't apply. By "friends and family" they probably mean the people they get their drugs from.

+1

It is not a right to live wherever you want to live. There has to be a balance in some of these societal expectations.

Actually, it is kind of a right. It is not a right, however, to impose an externality on the place you live by, say, living rough on a city sidewalk or to be subsidized for the choice you made on where to live.

How is it a right to live wherever you want to live when you can’t afford those circumstances?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP is incorrect. People are allowed to self certify in DC without ID.

Upper NW has an area in which vouchers are funded at 187% of HUD market rate, highest in the nation.

They’re a windfall for shady landlord investors. When a unit is covered by a voucher it automatically loses it rent controlled status. So greedy landlords enjoy the cash windfall, reduce rent-controlled restrictions, and watch as longtime tenants on low or fixed incomes leave because of some of the social challenges resulting from concentrations of voucher tenants in the building. In a few short years the investor landlord can redevelop the building as upmarket housing and has been paid handsomely by the taxpayer in the meantime.

That was the case for years, that a unit came out of rent control. It has recently been changed. I don't think there is any count of the hundreds or more units that were lost to the rent control program over the preceding years. For more on the PP's point, see the WP series on Sedgewick Gardens, was before the pandemic, prob @ 2019.

This is correct. The Council closed the rent-control loophole, but only after the WaPo uncovered it. But who knows how many units now are not covered by rent control in buildings that usually would have it. Probably hundreds, making the city's affordable-housing problem that much worse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it crazy to accommodate so many in DC, why can't federal government give them incentives to go to areas where cost of living is low and entry level jobs in abundance?

They definitely do this but many people understandably don’t want to move away from family/friends, especially to more rural places that have far fewer available resources like child care, mental health care, etc.

The demographics of my hometown in Western Pennsylvania changed a great deal due to the importation of Section 8 families from DC, Philly, and other cities. It’s big time Trump country though and I sure wouldn’t want to live there as a minority, poor or not.

So they want to stick around DC for "friends and family" yet those friends and family obviously haven't done a damn thing for them and aren't helping, given they're homeless.
Doesn't really sound like a viable reason. Meanwhile there are a lot of homeless in DC who aren't from DC for whom that reasoning doesn't apply. By "friends and family" they probably mean the people they get their drugs from.

+1

It is not a right to live wherever you want to live. There has to be a balance in some of these societal expectations.

Actually, it is kind of a right. It is not a right, however, to impose an externality on the place you live by, say, living rough on a city sidewalk or to be subsidized for the choice you made on where to live.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it crazy to accommodate so many in DC, why can't federal government give them incentives to go to areas where cost of living is low and entry level jobs in abundance?

They definitely do this but many people understandably don’t want to move away from family/friends, especially to more rural places that have far fewer available resources like child care, mental health care, etc.

The demographics of my hometown in Western Pennsylvania changed a great deal due to the importation of Section 8 families from DC, Philly, and other cities. It’s big time Trump country though and I sure wouldn’t want to live there as a minority, poor or not.

So they want to stick around DC for "friends and family" yet those friends and family obviously haven't done a damn thing for them and aren't helping, given they're homeless.
Doesn't really sound like a viable reason. Meanwhile there are a lot of homeless in DC who aren't from DC for whom that reasoning doesn't apply. By "friends and family" they probably mean the people they get their drugs from.

+1

It is not a right to live wherever you want to live. There has to be a balance in some of these societal expectations.